Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I said something "biased"? Perhaps you don't know what the word means. Pray tell, what was it that I said that you thought was "biased"?

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

For club -- Menzie Chinn, Assessing the stimulus and its aftermath.

Re those estimates of the efficiency of the stimulus that bothered you.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

seriously? when you've drank far too much so that you can't possibly get hard do you turn on youporn and go through the motions?

Okay here goes- you blamed Congress for letting our ATC become so bad. In particular you said:

"But we have a Congress that does not seem to care about solving these problems, and is instead shutting down the FAA over a minor squabble about subsidies for rural air service and rules about how airlines can be unionized."

Now I read that as implying the current house (see the part about the FAA there?) was to blame. Only a biased* brain, and a feverish one at that could have made that statement as it is absurd on it's face, but make it you did.

*instead of biased would you feel better with "so unable to blame anyone other than a Republican that i am blaming the congress that hasn't sat for a year yet for a problem I had called long lasting. It's like when you blamed Bush since he didn't fix NO's levees prior to Katrina. As an olive branch I will admit the bias is within the level of normal, given your abnormalities.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Why would you read "Congress" to mean "one half of Congress?"

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

That seems to point out one small problems with the estimates (relating to the right's ability to count). There are so many other problems....

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

so the faa thing isn't "simple tea party craziness?"

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I see how you reached your conclusion, but it's still starts with your error/assumption and not his implication.

Also, given that he predicted that board consensus would be with the tea party on the question of rural airport subsidies, no, I don't think it was "simple tea party craziness."

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I didn't say current and I didn't say the House. (Congress is both the House and the Senate. The FAA shutdown happened because the two couldn't agree on the aforementioned issues.) The problem is with your reading.

Soros and the Black Panthers scared Hank's aunt from voting
 

I agree that you're all crazy, and most of you are simple, too, but I still don't think the quoted phrase really works.

Many of the conspiracies reach unimaginable heights and involve institutions and individuals the likes of which you really wouldn't believe.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I'm sorry, I have no idea what the second sentence means.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

So if I have adder go back and research your posts on the faa thing you won't have posted which party was at fault? if you can clear an adder search I'll give you the win! I don't think you'd clear a search though:(:(

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I don't think the Tea Partiers were driving the FAA bill at all. As far as I can tell, it was a fight between the Republican House and Democratic Senate over whether Delta employees would be allowed to unionize. The House was using the FAA bill to reverse rule-making that unions like and Delta doesn't. The stuff about rural subsidies was cover.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I don't recall that I posted on the FAA thing so it shouldn't take you very long.

For a fiscal conservative, there is obvious lunacy in declining to collect $200 million/week in taxes in a fight over specific subsidies in a bill that runs $200 million/year. The fact that Tea Partiers weren't up in arms about this -- as far as I noticed, anyway -- confirms either that they aren't fiscal conservatives, that they are just Republican loyalists, or both.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

And your constant and tendentious abuse of notional burdens of proof in conversations here are a reminder of the funnest parts of litigation. Carry on.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Ty said the FAA is currently unfunded because congress can't agree over subsidies for rural airports and unionization of some federal workers. He then said the board would likely agree on the subsidies. The agreement he implied is that the board consensus would be against the subsidies. The tea party members of the house are also against the subsidies (for the most part) or at least they should be.

Thus Ty anticipated that the consensus here would be with the tea party on the question of subsidies. Thus implying that he is against the subsidies. So it's a little strange for you think he was blaming the current failure to fund the FAA only on "tea party craziness" where he agrees with part of it.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Club, when you next blow through here, can i get a sanity check?

In other news
 

This looks potentially fantastic. Do you think we can squeeze a few million jobs out of it (obviously no)?

Re: In other news
 

Looks like the sort of crap that could empty out hospital beds and lead to a recession.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Michael Lewis on the impeding collapse of the European monetary union.

I'm only partway through, but so far it is very good and very funny.

air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

I studied the technical reports on the alleged benefits. then I found something dumbed down for you guys.

http://www.time.com/time/interactive...653542,00.html

This explains why GPS could speed flights, but it doesn't really explain "delays." certainly I can assure you that these advancements will speed flights, but if enacted then the expected flight times will be reduced. Nothing explains why delays will be reduced.

abridged note to adder and Ty- This technology will make flights shorter, but the airlines will then set arrival times earlier. delays won't be reduced. n.b. I am not saying reducing flight times would not be a good thing.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

In other words, lots of people say money and technology would reduce delays, but you continue to resist the notion because I suggested it.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

You are mental, right?

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

i will respond to your post as best i can understand it. Those of us with technical degrees agree that flights can be shorter, and thus likely also cheaper, with GPS ATC. I'm not sure how much cost could be involved in the switch, as the satellites exist. Perhaps closing the radar spots will result in some jobs lost, but fuck them. We should go to GPS.

but, that has nothing to do with flight delays. If we switch we will have shorter expected flight times, but i don't see why delays would be reduced.

no one in any of the learned pieces I read, or the popular pieces I linked, says delays will be reduced. If flights times are shortened then arrival times will be shortened, then when the flight is 5 minutes late it will still be delayed.

Your bloggers meant "if we make a 5 hour flight 1/2 hour shorter, then the new shorter flights will less likely be delayed if we keep the fiction of the old arrival times." I mean fuck, let's go back to arrival times from the 50s. I bet delta is around 95% on time right now with that as the goal.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

hi!

confidential to RT: I've been telling you this, but now you have to act. All competitive environments separate based upon ability. Baseball has minor and major leagues as an example. Adder Gatti and GGG have no business posting on this forum. It's not fair to them. Let's create an instructional thread/board for them to work on developing some ability.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

Not having Flash on this device, I can't see all of that Time piece you linked, but I can see that the headline is How to Eliminate Flight Delays.

Or, what I said.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

So several hours later you link to what I linked to and say much of what I said about it, except with blind eye to how greater capacity can facilitate more efficient takeoff and landing, and this indicates that I lack capacity? Interesting.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

Actually you said a significant portion ofmdelays result from inadequate tech. Hank no longer seems to disagree and is instead now arguing that the airlines will adjust so they are still delayed, just off a more efficient baseline.

In other words he concedes the point but is trying to pretend otherwise.

Re: In other news
 

Maybe they should try it on apes first. http://www.365horrormovie.com/wp-con...dge-attack.jpg

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

I almost never look at what you link to. As I say i read detailed technical reports to understand the point, then found a piece for the mob that you could understand. if I found something that you had linked all that means is I was successful in matching what I found to your intellectual level.

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

so in a world where Time magazine is a source of accurate technical analysis you win. :) In a world that understands technical terms and technical concepts you lose :(

Re: air traffic control is a motherfucker
 

Translation: "yes, I am mental."

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Wait! Are you saying you're not really 6'10" and haevn't won 98% of your PB arguments?

P.S. Good for Spanky. I hear repressed GOP women can really go wild in the sack.

S_A_M

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I think the benefit of satellite systems over ground based radar has to do both with the precision of the systems (margins of error).

If we can track the location of the planes with greater accuracy than allowed by ground-based radar, the controllers can let them run closer together in both space (altitude) and time.

S_A_M

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

S.T.P. Hank's read all the technical reports and has concluded, via his vast scientific knowledge (not including the definition of hypothesis), that this is wrong. We mortal cannot question the wisdom of the Hank and his mystery sources.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Now, it's been 20 years since I've any experience in this vein, but 20 years ago, based on some targetted research, I concluded that this was a line used by people naturally drawn to muffies to begin with. My conclusion was that wild in the sack was closely tied to religion, and the WASPie represssed protestant was at the bottom in all categories.

Now, if he's targetting some of the born-again GOPers, I'm willing to revisit the assessement. I have no views on the mormon question. Or if he's only focused on preggos.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

My question* wasn't how it could speed things up but how it could it eliminate the delays. Yes an la to NYC flight might be 15 minutes quicker but that goes to an earlier eta not eliminating delays relative to eta.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Catholic girls.

S_A_M

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

I have not read this FAA saga with any care, or any of the links really at all, but since I can't avoid it, I'll express a couple half-baked opinions:

(1) I see your point, though it seems like it took you a long time to figure it out yourself and say it in a clear manner - I trust you're left the single malt alone the last couple days, or you'd have a heluva headache right now.

(2) I could see several ways in which the shorter flights would also be more predictable (e.g., easier to predict time on a straight line path versus on a weaving path where you don't necessarily even know the weave before hand). I trust more predictable means easier to schedule.

(3) I can also see several ways shorter flights could be tougher to predict. Pack those babies in tighter and it's easier to have one screw up slow a bunch of them down.

(4) Carry on. I am, at least, more interested in this issue than the caddies.

It's good to see you not being a complete troll for once.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

Indeed. But Catholics are still mostly Dems.

To say nothing of jewesses. Also still mostly Dems.

Re: My God, you are an idiot.
 

And what did your technical papers say about how greater capacity to handle planes in the air at the busiest airports would affect delays (some of which result from the number of planes exceeding the capacity to handle them concurrently)?